Use it or lose it.
Our Granite Roots
NH ConstitutionFair Elections FundUser loginGrow the Grassroots!Stay in Touch with your Public Servants!DFNH GearGranite Roots ArchivesHands-On Elections HandbookElection Training from the NH Dept. of StateCounting the VotesWe're Counting the Votes Kit Or send your check to DFNH, PO Box 717, Concord, NH 03301 NavigationWho's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 88 guests online.
Blogs
Local coalition groupsDemocracy for America
Daily Kos
Syndicate |
Texas County Clerk faxes Congress in opposition to Holt Bill
March 28, 2007
To Whom This Concerns and Will Listen, Washington, D.C. Ref: H.R. 811 and SB 559 Howdy from Texas, I am just a rural County Clerk from Jackson County, Texas, but oversee the Election held in our County. We just have a little over 9,000 registered voters so my voice may not speak as load as the urban counties and more populated area. VOTE NO, CONCERNING H.R. 811 and S.B. 559. I have not heard any complaints from our County Voters on using the DRE's purchased last year under the HAVA grant funds. The voters individually have been shown to review the summary page at the end of ballot on how their vote will be cast prior to touching the Cast Ballot Button. The voter is responsible how they marked the old paper ballot and now using the DRE's. To retrofit our current machines in this rural area most likely will not happen in time you intend, thus making us out of compliance. Thus Vote No. The federal government via state officials certified the machines we could purchase under HAVA as built. If change is necessary, test with proof of facts needs to conclude before new bills forcing updates. Vote No. Conversion time and training in time for 2008 would be impossible. Vote No. Staffing to do Manual Audit by Hand Count with proper training needs to be done now or you may see on television another Florida recount mess. Vote No. The question of Certification of Open Source Software sound to me like this is private vendor push to corrode the private enterprise America was built on. Who is trying to secure private information? Smells like bad Fish! Any information necessary to make sound decision should have been made prior to past certification. If the drug industry was going to approve, don't you think test would be necessary prior to approval? Don't pass out the pill until certified. Not after the fact and want the formula, just prove it works. This really sounds like someone is seeking private sole source information. Don't stay in the ditch and smell like the dirty hogs! Vote No. On the issue of wireless/internet, we do not have internet at our rural voting precinct and this can not be of any concern. So what I am saying, "is one size does not fit all"! Don't punish us for what others may be doing. Vote No Posting Notice of confirmed vote is on the summary page of DRE. I am total against any one walking out with copy of how they voted. Back in the paper ballot days, you did not tear off a back NCR copy of how you voted. I feel employers might require seeing a copy and that would be BAD. Vote No. Lastly, concerning funding, how in the world would H.R. 811 provide time enough to get the money to trickle down from Washington to Jackson County, Texas to pay for and get implemented? Vote No. Your attention to this matter is appreciated. I may be simple in my thoughts, but I am right here where the rubber hits the road as the say. A sound like this electronic voting age is big money and the industry is fighting amongst themselves. The regular voter seems to be happy as it is. Vote NO Sincerely, By ntobi at 03/29/2007 - 23:55 | Fair elections | Federal Election Legislation | Holt Bill | login or register to post comments
|
US ConstitutionAction AlertsVoting in NHIraq War Casualty CountVideosElection IntegrityElection Integrity ResourcesBrowse eventsUpcoming events
Feature stories
|